In Re Nickolas Jermaine Taylor v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 13, 2025
• Docket: 09-25-00069-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00069-CV __________________

IN RE NICKOLAS JERMAINE TAYLOR

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding County Court at Law No. 3 of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 2021-09-13429 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In a petition for a writ of mandamus, Nickolas Jermaine Taylor, Relator, asks

this Court to compel the trial court to modify the 2022 final order in a suit affecting

the parent-child relationship (SAPCR) and transfer the case to another county. We

deny mandamus relief. 1

1Taylor failed to certify that he reviewed the petition and concluded that every

factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appellate record. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j). He did not properly authenticate the mandamus record. See id. 52.7(a). These defects provide additional reasons for this Court to deny mandamus relief. 1 In September 2021, Real Party in Interest Diana J. Caban filed a suit affecting

the parent-child relationship in the County Court at Law Number 3 of Montgomery

County, Texas. The following month, Taylor filed a suit for divorce and a separate

SAPCR petition in the 306th District Court of Galveston County, Texas, and filed a

motion to transfer the Montgomery County SAPCR to the 306th District Court. It

appears Taylor’s motion to transfer the case to Galveston County was denied after

Taylor failed to appear for a scheduled hearing on October 27, 2021. In January

2022, the 306th District Court granted Caban’s motion for summary judgment for a

declaratory judgment, finally disposing of trial Cause Number 21-FD-2106.

In April 2022, a final order in Trial Cause Number 2021-09-13429 was signed

in the Montgomery County Court at Law Number 3. The order recites that Taylor

made a general appearance in the case and was duly notified of the hearing but failed

to appear and defaulted. Caban and Taylor were appointed joint managing

conservators, but Caban had the exclusive right to designate the child’s residence.

Taylor did not perfect an appeal in either the Montgomery County case or the

Galveston County case.

In May 2023, Taylor obtained a protective order in the 280th District Court of

Harris County. The protective order states, “There shall be no possession and access

unless granted by CCCL#3 in Montgomery Cty., TX, which is the Court of

Continuing Jurisdiction.” In June 2023, Taylor obtained a temporary restraining

2 order from the County Court at Law Number 3 of Montgomery County, Texas, in

Trial Cause Number 2021-09-13429. The temporary restraining order prohibited

Caban from removing the child from Taylor’s possession but stated the order would

expire after fourteen days and scheduled a hearing on temporary orders for June 21,

2023. In July 2023, Taylor filed a petition to modify the SAPCR in Trial Cause

Number 2021-02-13429. In March 2024, the trial court dismissed Taylor’s petition

for modification of the SAPCR for want of prosecution. On April 19, 2024, the trial

court denied Taylor’s motion to reinstate the case on the docket. Taylor did not

perfect an appeal from the trial court’s orders dismissing the case for want of

prosecution.

In his mandamus petition, Taylor claims that he attended a hearing in

Montgomery County on March 5, 2025, to request redaction of personal identifying

information. He claims the trial court failed to redact Taylor’s address from

documents in the court’s records.

On March 6, 2025, Taylor filed an original SAPCR petition in the 257th

District Court of Harris County. The petition recites, “There are no court orders

about any of the child(ren). No other Court has continuing jurisdiction over this case

of the child(ren).”

Mandamus relief is an extraordinary remedy that issues only to correct a clear

abuse of discretion for which the relator has no adequate remedy by appeal. See In

3 re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.

proceeding); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig.

proceeding). Taylor argues, “By dismissing Relator’s case and refusing to yield

jurisdiction to the Galveston County or Harris County District Court where the

Divorce was pending and where the SAPCR is currently pending, Respondent Judge

has effectively nullified the Protective Order, created confusion about the governing

orders, and placed the child’s safety and well-being at risk.” Having reviewed the

petition for a writ of mandamus, we conclude that the Relator has not shown that the

trial court committed a clear abuse of discretion from which there is no adequate

remedy by appeal. Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. See

Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). All pending motions are denied.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on March 12, 2025 Opinion Delivered March 13, 2025

Before Golemon, C.J., Wright and Chambers, JJ.